Blowing with the wind, is he? Someone inform me if this isn’t just pure posturing for voters.

Edit: Holy crap! What an interesting split on this comment. Look people, all I was trying to do was glean more info on what type of billionaire behavior this guy’s been exhibiting, and perhaps have a measured discussion on the subject. Truth be told, no billionaire or person of such excessive means can be trusted until separated from such wealth and means, and certainly all high profile politicians say the favorable thing and then do something else. I’d rather folks share what they know etc even just to approximate where this guy is on that scale; it’s interesting (and somewhat disappointing) that the middle ground I imagined (ie: has done some good, still don’t trust him) just really not represented here. I just don’t know where the bar is anymore. I do know that getting vitriolic and irrational, or conversely strongly supporting establishment types is ultimately distracting and a useful tool to those in power.

Hey! These bruises are just makeup!

Well since he’s already metaphorically done it, I guess they figured they might as well set a literal precedent.

Edit: Also, gives me Man in The High Castle vibes. Did we switch to a timeline adjacent or something somehow?

Again it is literally not what you are continually stating in your comments: “editorializing the title” and even then I clearly posted the title and my particular bullshit afterwards. Rewrite the rule more carefully, or continue having this argument almost every single day with various parties (seems a common occurrence from my passive observation). Need not discuss it more; I’ve already altered my post to appease you. Just wish you’d understand your obvious and blatant error (and so do others).

Did I say I gave a shit? It seems like a lot of folks like to move with their preconceptions and not even attempt to understand what is being output to them. The whole point of putting this here was to illustrate your first point.

Well you should make it a rule then. I’m pretty sure you just enjoy gaslighting. Or you could remove the article for my aforementioned reason: the whole reason behind posting it is editorial/critical: please remove it for that!

Hey now, I did not alter the title. And that’s what is clearly cited in the 1st rule. Altering. I added editorial context; the whole point of my post was to editorialize the title, and article contents. It was silly, I guess.

Anyways, I enjoyed this little exchange of ours. I’m gonna alter my title, just in case this develops.

“The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.” Same as it always has been.

“Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.”

Posted exact title: check. Added relevant context: check. Editorialized in the body: check.

Edit: it’s not very popular anyway. Pretty sure I did not successfully get my point across and now the post just feels inappropes.

I’m mostly despondent at this point; just got acutely upset when I heard this shit again. It does seem likely that our systems are broken backwards and it will all have to go, and that just seems like a lot more pain and suffering for most of us. All while the people that have stolen the levers of power make a buck to be buried in, and the protectors of those levers left or were replaced long ago. And I swear I remember a time when at least npr would report basic objective facts without such transparent agenda. And back to despondency I go.

So they’re releasing dangerous criminals onto the street, and doing their best to hide any and all information about it. Understood.

Trump/Epstein Files, or Trump-Epstein files if you prefer. I can appreciate putting his name first in there too.

I’m pretty sure they mean Matt Walsh’s media empire, unless the situation has changed.

Yes that is indeed generally the state of things. It used to be the general american delusion was temporarily embarrassed millionaire; now it seems so much worse, and diversified. How do you break a population of that? Guh what a fuckin mess.

I’m gonna have to agree. More visible people need to start saying shit like this and louder.

edit: hold on. “shit like this” could be anything. I’m talking about the obvious tyranny, human degradation, and sheer dissolution of collective reality we’re living in, obviously.

This is indeed a disturbing universe.

The big brained response is disappointing yet not surprising. No one said they’re ok, just that you made erroneous claims and are over simple. Ironic comment about dur reading is hard. Very low effort and trite.

If you can’t understand that its because of the context, and that your brief initial comment is ignorant/simple, then it is probably not worth trying to persuade you towards any nuance involved here. Furthermore, no where is it mentioned that these weapons are autonomous; just robots/drones, giving a country under invasion a much needed advantage. Some of your comments seem to indicate a support of Russia, so again, likely spurious effort here.

I understand that there are generally rules on title posting, etc, but hear me out: title corrections are a must these days. “American elected despot want to engage in further human trafficking. Other dictators receptive.”

Jesus, I thought it said Iran instead of ice. And I was thinking how that is kind of a stupid idea. What a fucking timeline.

Not a clue about the nature of your hostility, so I’ll just leave you with it. I was mostly reactive regarding the poor quality of a side’s propaganda, and musing on it. I feel like I’d be wasting my time responding to surreptitious bullet points.

Edit: I’m not sure how other aren’t seeing how you have turned things we agree upon into point of perceived attack, but you’re good. I admit, you like hitting the enter key twice a alot. My original point that your source video for this is obvious garbage still stands. Of course, I am not disputing events as reported. You should try paragraphs.